PGA Commentary: Swing Analysis on Poor Shots

[Hardspoon]

This is something I've always wondered about when a PGA Tour broadcast, and they do a slow-motion (SwingVision, etc.) analysis of a player's swing on a poor shot.  Often, you'll hear something like "he was too fast at the top" our "his arms got ahead of his shoulders" or other errors in the specific swing that led to the poor shot.

Generally speaking, are these actually accurate?

I always assumed that that tour players' swings consistent enough where you couldn't actually see the specific flaw of that single swing on video, even in slow motion...and this is just a case of the announcer knowing the result and projecting it into the analysis.  But, I thought I'd throw this out there as a topic for discussion.

Here is an example:

 

[Rainmaker]

I have always wondered the same thing . .I know that I can almost never see what they're talking about.  In this case, I don't even really understand what it means to "come out of it with your left shoulder" . . .

[Aguirre]

I think you're right about how the announcers use the shot path and trajectory to make certain assumptions about what went wrong with the swing.  

I mean, for us, it could be that we gripped the 7 iron a little too strong that time, or set up poorly, or any thousands of things because we are not consistent.  With the pros, it's more predictable about what went wrong. 

[iacas]

4 hours ago, Hardspoon said:

Generally speaking, are these actually accurate?

No.

[mcanadiens]

One of many things that hackers like me got to take with a grain of salt.

Fortunately the TV boys made it pretty easy to suss them out.  

 

[nevets88]

What would be truly objective is if they had another swing video where the player hits a great shot. Then put the bad shot alongside the good shot side by side, hopefully the angles and clubs are the same, which usually isn't the case. You're not going to see much of a difference 30 fps. Can one in 240fps? I would guess the player's instructor definitely, who knows his student's tendencies. 

I would love to do a Coke-Pepsi test on these guys. Not tell them which swing is bad in the side by side. You're gonna need high thick boots to walk through the bullsh*t. 

But what are these guys there for? To speak the truth? Or to get ratings? They're there to tell us stuff to keep us watching so we buy the Acme Smith Widget. So they dress up their analysis to sound cool and interesting. Notice the symmetry in the lines drawn. And adjectives like impossible, unbelievable, incredible. That they do very well because I believed the bullsh@t at one point, which upsets me because I know inherently most of what's on TV is superficial.

 

 

[MacDutch]

8 hours ago, iacas said:

No.

Okay, thats clear  but could you be more specific? Are they all just guessing (and mostly wrong?), is it too difficult to tell in a split second? Are there  some guys that are right most of the time? Nick Faldo, how about him?

Edited May 23, 2016 by MacDutch

[Lazarus]

An example is the guys running the rule over Jordan's swing yesterday. If it was really a simple matter of getting his weight less off his heels, then I am sure he'd have tried that or focused on his form and posture on the range and seen some improvement.

I have a inbuilt suspicion now of random golf advice/tips unless you have time to discuss and think about it or you know the author somewhat or can see how it applies to your swing.

 

[boogielicious]

46 minutes ago, Lazarus said:

An example is the guys running the rule over Jordan's swing yesterday. If it was really a simple matter of getting his weight less off his heels, then I am sure he'd have tried that or focused on his form and posture on the range and seen some improvement.

I have a inbuilt suspicion now of random golf advice/tips unless you have time to discuss and think about it or you know the author somewhat or can see how it applies to your swing.

 

I saw that one as well. Peter Kostis seems to vary what is important from swing to swing. I usually just watch the video and tune him out.

[nevets88]

3 hours ago, MacDutch said:

Okay, thats clear  but could you be more specific? Are they all just guessing (and mostly wrong?), is it too difficult to tell in a split second? Are there  some guys that are right most of the time? Nick Faldo, how about him?

I'm still amazed at instructors who look at a faulty amateur swing in real time and in a couple of swings or fewer, pick out the biggest flaw. But these are the top 0.0001% or whatever of all golfers. While it's easy to pick out quirks in a pro swing,  it's much much harder to pick out a bad swing relative to a good swing with high speed video let alone 30 fps, realtime. It's what, a 2-3 degree difference in plane, face, whatever that makes a bad shot, a bad shot.

[boogielicious]

Here's the Kostis one @Lazarus mentioned.

 

[colin007]

3 hours ago, boogielicious said:

Here's the Kostis one @Lazarus mentioned.

 

 

yeah, that one looks pretty much like all his swings that turn out great.

[GolfMaineiac26]

I've been a fan of Golf all my life and have watched many tournaments and I remember when they didn't have any of this fancy shot/swing analysis, nor the commentators critiquing players stance, swing, ect. at least not as in depth as they do today, I think it's something that they've been told to do by upper management, to keep viewers locked in. 

 

[rehmwa]

Well, I'm really not certain how to interpret those announcers' analysis if they won't put a bunch of stones on the ground in various patterns first.....

(If you've been here long enough, you'll know what I'm talking about)

[natureboy]

15 hours ago, boogielicious said:

Here's the Kostis one @Lazarus mentioned.

 

I guess they have to justify the swing camera, which is pretty awesome. I suppose a genuine, thorough analysis would take too long and not be juicy enough.

Spieth clearly has the same sit back look in 2015. 

A little bit of self-applied pressure / burden of self expectations could probably add just enough tension to increase the rate of error in an otherwise sound swing.

[saevel25]

7 hours ago, natureboy said:

A little bit of self-applied pressure / burden of self expectations could probably add just enough tension to increase the rate of error in an otherwise sound swing.

It could be a stupid monkey deal here. It sounds like his miss over the years has been right. I'm not sure if he's been trying to fix that or not.

It could be he's having too many thoughts in his head. It's very hard to tell what is going on. Key 4 and Key 5 control is fickle. When you are generating 115 mph clubhead speed, shots can look a lot worse compared to a guy swinging at 105 mph. 

 

 

[nevets88]

It's not officially his second year, but I can't think of a more appropriate moniker than "sophomore slump". McIlroy is prescient so far, no?

[colin007]

i know it not quite on topic, but Speefs swings have always looked a bit "wipey" to me, prone to a miss right.